Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 23

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 23, 2026.

Green leafhopper

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was disambiguate. (non-admin closure) Chess enjoyer (talk) 02:04, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Green leafhopper → Cicadella viridis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Several species in the genus Nephotettix are also called green leafhoppers. Rather than redirecting only to C. viridis, perhaps this page could be turned into a disambiguation page? Uffda608 (talk) 08:54, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguate, provided the name is mentioned in those articles. Paradoctor (talk) 19:49, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
dabify per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:58, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
Delete most leafhoppers are green. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 14:26, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
Citation needed. See the images at Leafhopper.

More to the point, there is a distinction between "green leafhopper" as a description and "green leafhopper" as an epithet. Especially as the forewings are [...] blue or dark bluish in males of cicadella viridis. Paradoctor (talk) 11:18, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguation draft requested (done) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Drafted Sign² (talk) 02:10, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Nephotettix. --BDD (talk) 16:00, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Ok, disambiguate. The genus article Empoasca itself doesn't show justification for inclusion, but even if it's omitted, the disambiguation page is warranted. --BDD (talk) 22:11, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Disambiguate, delete, or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 16:27, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguate per nom. NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 18:11, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete Many leafhoppers are green. While consensus can change, this probably should be deleted, just like yellow fly, as it's too ambiguous. ~2026-16755-69 (talk) 17:06, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Missed this? Paradoctor (talk) 20:23, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

"Yellow fly" is also a formal name that refers solely to the yellow fly of the dismal swamp. However, that is far from the only yellow fly, much like how cicadella viridis is far from the only green leafhopper. ~2026-16755-69 (talk) 12:17, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Descriptions or epithets? Paradoctor (talk) 13:28, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Apologies for missing this earlier: Deletion is out anyway. Given that "green leafhopper" is a name of Cicadella viridis, the only options on the table are keep/retarget/dabify. Paradoctor (talk) 16:02, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Does somebody want to draft a dab?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:52, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Disambig. I've made a very minor tweak to the drafted disambiguation page. It could be more friendly to lay audiences but it is still the best option imo. Thryduulf (talk) 09:15, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Smithland railway station

The result of the discussion was Delete. Thryduulf (talk) 09:18, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Smithland railway station → Swithland railway station (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Incorrect spelling which is why page was then moved. I can understand this mix up but don't think it meets criteria for inclusion as a misspelling. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 22:01, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete as there is no reason to keep this redirect. M and W are quite far apart on a standard QWERTY keyboard, making this an implausible typo. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:14, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
Leaning keep, even if this not close on the keyboard, it can clearly easily be misread this way. BD2412 T 16:22, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete it was at this title for a few hours in 2017 and I can't find any evidence it is or was called this, Google suggests there are other stations but not railway stations called "Smithland". Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:46, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Weak keep. Redirects are cheap and I can imagine someone hearing the term as 'smith' instead of 'swith' and thus searching for that term instead. Katiedevi (talk) 03:45, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete. Searching "Smithland railway station" literally gives "No results found for "Smithland railway station" -wikipedia.", so it seems extremely unlikely to search for. There's no reason to keep this no-result redirect that resulted after a page move only a few hours after creation. In addition, it may also be confused with Smith Lands Station, which was the Wikipedia search suggestion given when searching for "Smithland station". Mathguy2718 (talk) 04:24, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete, it's not a plausible misspelling. Suonii180 (talk) 20:34, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Phoenix (2019 film)

The result of the discussion was delete. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:57, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Phoenix (2019 film) → Terminator: Dark Fate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Ambiguous and confusing redirect. Could just as easily refer to Dark Phoenix (film) also from 2019 Mysticair667537 (talk) 15:19, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Dark Phoenix (film) and slap a WP:HATNOTE if there is confusion. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 16:33, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:17, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Delete - no 2019 film called Phoenix at Phoenix § Film. Both current and proposed targets are poor choices for retargeting or disambiguation. Jay 💬 04:26, 21 February 2026 (UTC)
There's a bit more to this than meets the eye.
sv:Fenix (film) was a 2018 film, but it was released in some territories, including Sweden and Britain, in 2019. Though it has articles in three Wikipedias, coverage appears slim on enwiki, with only barebones facts available at either Camilla Strøm Henriksen or 2018 Toronto International Film Festival.
Phoenix, Oregon (film) was a 2019 film. Does it warrant a mention on the dab page? Maybe. The place Phoenix, Oregon gets mentioned, of course.
And as mentioned at the target, "Phoenix" was a working title for this film. J 947 ‡ ^edits 05:46, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 14:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete Seems to be a wrong term for a wide variety of things, and possibly a correct term for something we don't have content on. Seeing a redlink would hopefully tell then that and result in the reader using more specific terms to look for whatever they are looking for. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:06, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:42, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Pppery's rationale has convinced me that this is the best outcome here. Thryduulf (talk) 09:23, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Diquark condensate

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 4#Diquark condensate

Achievements of Ash Ketchum (Pokemon)

The result of the discussion was delete. Thryduulf (talk) 09:32, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Achievements of Ash Ketchum (Pokemon) → Ash Ketchum#Achievements (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete, term not mentioned in target article and the article doesn't have a section which specifically discusses his achievements in sufficient detail. Previously an article which was turned into a redirect in 2020 . I don't think it's a useful search term and the parentheses are not needed as there is not an article or redirect at Achievements of Ash Ketchum Suonii180 (talk) 19:52, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Delete: As unmentioned. Media Mender (chat, stalk) 23:23, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:31, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-redirect page content?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 19:49, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Potentially re-refine to Ash Ketchum#Appearances, which does list SOME of his achievements; that said, I can totally see an arguement re: implausibility.

History dive indicates pre-redirect content was hilariously incomplete, as by the time the article was BLAR'd it'd only managed to amass a short list of the eight Kanto gym badges and which episode Ash obtained them in; nowhere near comprehensive enough coverage to warrant keeping. The section it was redirected to, however, lasted until 2023 when it was removed as part of a flurry of trimming by user:Media Mender. Said section was more complete than the article version, but it was... nnnnnnot much better in other regards. Maybe we don't bring it back. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 02:32, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:38, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete implausible/unlikely search term, both for what it is ("achievements" of a fictional child cartoon character) and its unnecessary disambiguation. Sergecross73 msg me 10:55, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Free access

The result of the discussion was no consensus, disambiguate. (non-admin closure) J 947 ‡ ^edits 04:45, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Free access → Free content (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Access is not copyright, which is what the target is about. Possibly retarget to Open access? 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 12:11, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Delete (or retarget to gratis versus libre) - To me, 'free access' means I could access a place without payment. Note that in English, free either means 'free as in freedom' (libre/liberty), or 'free as in no payment' (gratis). JuniperChill (talk) 17:54, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Open access. Free as in beer.--Srleffler (talk) 20:39, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Disambig. This is a plausible search term for Free content, Open access, Free as in beer, free entry, and Accessibility at least. Thryduulf (talk) 13:30, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
dabify per Thryduulf --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:26, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguation draft requested (done) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:42, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Disambig drafted below the redirect per request. Thryduulf (talk) 09:40, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Chicago station

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#Chicago station

サンズ

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 4#サンズ

Super Pro Fighter Q

The result of the discussion was Delete Thryduulf (talk) 09:48, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Super Pro Fighter Q → Super Nintendo Entertainment System#Peripherals (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

What does this has to do what the target section? Anyways, delete. ~2025-42974-91 (talk) 19:20, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

keep, mentioned at target as a peripheral of the snes, pre-blar content also describes this as a snes thingy, logical redirect to have caesar (it/he) _{(talky place) (united bestowals)} 19:33, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
Comment: There is a mention, but it doesn't go into much detail about what it is. It's also pretty far away down the section, which makes me want to use an anchor to refine it. I wonder if it should be returned to red. Chess enjoyer (talk) 00:41, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:52, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:29, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete - yes, it was mentioned, but the content present at the time of the nomination was nothing more than a name drop that said virtually nothing to the reader on what it was. Further more, I've since removed the mention, as it was sourced to an unreliable emulation website that is in no way an RS. Sergecross73 msg me 13:49, 24 March 2026 (UTC)
Since the mention's gone now, Delete per myself and Sergecross73. Chess enjoyer (talk) 19:47, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Zhang Weiyin

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#Zhang Weiyin

I'm going to the bathroom to read.

The result of the discussion was retarget to List of last words (20th century)#Presley. (non-admin closure) J 947 ‡ ^edits 06:24, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm going to the bathroom to read.I'm going to the bathroom to read. → Elvis Presley (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Elvis Presley#Death, since it's his last words. ~2026-13617-37 (talk) 01:13, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete: Unnecessary redirect I made when I was younger. - RTSthestardust (talk) 02:21, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
Tag as G7? 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 18:56, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
Well @Organhaver, I think a good idea to tag as G7. VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 22:09, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
The nominator wants something else to happen to the redirect, so G7 shouldn't be used here. It's basically like a contested speedy deletion. Chess enjoyer (talk) 22:26, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
I never knew that! Interesting. (/positive) 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 22:32, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete, unmentioned, and generally unhelpful. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:12, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete as unhelpful and unnecessary NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 01:09, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to List of last words (20th century), where the words are mentioned. Specifically, I think an anchor should be created at the list entry, and the redirect should be refined to it. This would be useful to people who heard these words out of context, and don't know that they're the last words of the famous singer. Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:51, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
If anyone thinks the period is unnatural, would I'm going to the bathroom to read be okay to create? Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:58, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
I made the redirect. Feel free to bundle it. Chess enjoyer (talk) 01:59, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to List of last words (20th century) per Chess Enjoyer. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:23, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete per WP:UNNATURAL. I was going to say a weak retarget but period is unnatural. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 01:37, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
Is it really that unnatural if the search term is a quote? Chess enjoyer (talk) 01:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
@Chess enjoyer the period makes it unnatural. I have no issue on the quote itself but I have the problem with period at the end. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 06:25, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget per Chess enjoyer. This is a sentence, it's not unnatural to end a sentence with a full stop. Thryduulf (talk) 13:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:36, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment Should I nominate other last word redirects? ~2026-47839-7 (talk) 13:25, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget per Chess enjoyer – we only "delete." redirects with periods when the period is not part of the term itself. Nobody would argue that we should delete U.S. in favor of U.S, or move Apple Inc. without leaving a redirect. The connection between a sentence and its final period might be slightly weaker than that, but it's still a reasonable WP:AFFINITY. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:40, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:26, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete per Deacon Vorbis above. Another one of those things where I just can't fathom anyone typing that into a Wikipedia search bar whether its mentioned somewhere or not. Sergecross73 msg me 20:14, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Alleged assassination of Ali Khamenei

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#Alleged assassination of Ali Khamenei

Marrying for money

The result of the discussion was disambiguate per WP:BARTENDER without prejudice to converting to a broad-concept article. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:50, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Marrying for moneyMarrying for money → Transactional sex (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This topic could also refer to a Marriage of convenience or a Gold digger. Redirecting only to Transactional sex would narrow the scope of the topic and likely cause confusion. Uffda608 (talk) 12:43, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Normally I'd say retarget to Marriage of convenience through the WP:SMALLDETAILS of "they are specifically asking about a marriage and not sex", but that article needs some SERIOUS help-- logically it'd cover the topic, but it doesn't mention marriages for money at all... 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:50, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Not quite synonymous with any of the suggested targets—the current target is the worst match. Marrying for money is not exactly the same as a marriage of convenience or being a "gold digger". Absent explicit discussion of this, pointing it to Marriage of convenience or one of the other targets erroneously defines them as exactly synonymous and fails to address the specific topic readers are searching for. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:43, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
I'm inclined towards disambiguation here, with all the above topics and Dowry being things the searcher could be looking for. Search results are not at all helpful here, without quotes it's mostly just a collection of articles where marriage and money are mentioned, as an exact phrase the results are almost entirely plot summaries where characters do this. There does exist though an album titled "Re-Marrying for Money" (Henry Kaiser (musician)#Discography), Don't Marry for Money (a film) and "Marry for Money" (a song) that would be good see-alsos. There also seems to be a 1914 or 1915 film Marrying Money but the only mentions we have of that I've found are in actor's filmographies none of which are obviously a better target than any of the others. Thryduulf (talk) 12:49, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
I'm cool with a disambiguation as per this, yeah. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 13:37, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguate, preferably (in my opinion) at the title Marry for money, with this title pointed there, under a header that says Marry for money or Marrying for money may refer to... BD2412 T 03:22, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
I have no preference regarding which title the disambig is located at. Thryduulf (talk) 00:58, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguate if we are all in agreement that it could have more than one meaning User:53zodiac
Delete. Agree with Myceteae that none of the suggested targets are suitable entries for a dab page. Jay 💬 13:03, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguation draft requested (done) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:43, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Pppery: Drafted. Cheers! BD2412 T 03:31, 24 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose disambiguation but support a broad-concept article (at Marrying for money), a format that aligns much more with the opinions above. This isn't an ambiguous title: it's a title with a quite particular and quite well-known meaning; it's just that discussion of that meaning is spread out through multiple articles. Hypergamy should be linked. Second choice delete. J 947 ‡ ^edits 07:06, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:50, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguate to marriage of convenience and gold digger; transactional sex is basically just prostitution, both in the normal sense and in "exalted" forms. This is marriage, at least, and it needs to be distinguished from prostitution. Nyttend (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguate per above NightWolf1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 13:03, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Pokemon master

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 2#Pokemon master

Birtish

The result of the discussion was retarget to British. As pointed out by Chess enjoyer, for Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point to apply one first has to disrupt Wikipedia. (non-admin closure) J 947 ‡ ^edits 06:44, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

BirtishBirtish → Birt (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Target has no entries that could be called "Birtish". Its creation may be related to this discussion on Template:Use Birtish English, where the only internal link exists at this time. Searching on Google and searches on Wikipedia outside articles show that "Birtish" is most likely a misspelling for "British". Also, note Steel1943's comment on the discussion for Template:Use Birtish English that was made months before this redirect was created, which said:

Delete [Template:Use Birtish English]. If this typo was so common, the redirect Birtish would have existed sometime during the almost 25+ years of Wikipedia's existence, but it never has.

What do others think? Mathguy2718 (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Misspellings are more likely to happen in sentences like in the template than as standalone words. Not all common or standart misspellings have a redirect, but this one had, except it wasn't standalone or in the mainspace. Abesca (talk) 00:14, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

...What/Huh? That's not clear at all. Steel1943 (talk) 23:28, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to British and tag as {{r from misspelling}}. External search results show this is an error that does occur naturally outside Wikipedia, so it's not implausible that it could be helpful. It's not just one that appears in informal contexts; see eg. Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, New York Times. Something not existing before on Wikipedia doesn't mean it shouldn't; there are a lot of things on Wikipedia that editors just haven't gotten around to yet. If it exists for a while and the traffic report shows negligible usage, then it can be renominated. – Scyrme (talk) 00:18, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't especially like keeping redirect misspellings, but probably retarget and tag as above. Seems to be used frequent enough. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 00:36, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget per Scyrme, this is plausible, reasonably common and pretty unambiguous. Thryduulf (talk) 12:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Speedy delete, R3, and as a WP:POINTy creation after the previous RFD. This is not a spelling error, but a typo, and this typo is no more deserving of a redirect than any other. Searches find matches for all sorts of them, such as "Brtiish". Again, we managed for 25+ years without this without any problems, and like pointed out in an rfd a few days ago, searches for "Birtish empire" and "Birtish columbia" find their targets just fine, rendering this especially useless. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:54, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Redirects from plausible, common typos aren't unusual. {{r from typo}} is a redirect to {{r from misspelling}}, and hundreds of redirects from typos use that redirect. The rcat description for {{r from misspelling}} encompasses typos: This is a redirect from a misspelling or typographical error. – Scyrme (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete. WP:POINTy at this point if there is not sufficient evidence. We don't want to be the ones encouraging an unlikely misspelling by having this spelling flow all over Wikipedia mirrors. Steel1943 (talk) 23:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
What makes you think it's unlikely? There's plenty of evidence of people making this exact mistake, as has already been shown.
Regarding, WP:POINTy, that is about editors who apply an interpretation of policies/guidelines they disagree with to make a point about how bad it would be to apply the interpretation consistently. I don't see how that applies here. Hypothetically, the equivalent here would be nominating other redirects that have the same typo (if they existed) for deletion to try to make a point of how disruptive it would be to actually do that. This redirect isn't any more disruptive than any other redirect from a plausible typo or misspelling. – Scyrme (talk) 23:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Retarget to British per Scyrme. This is a typo, a recently created one at that, but as demonstrated above it's not an implausible one, so R3 does not apply. I don't think the act of creating this redirect is disruptive, so WP:POINT doesn't apply either (not to mention that the creator didn't participate in the RFD, so I'm not sure what point the others think they're trying to make). That we went over 2 decades without having this redirect means absolutely nothing, since you could use that argument to ban the creation of new articles (which I'm not going to do, as that would be disrupting Wikipedia to make a point). As for the argument about search results, you need to make an extra click to reach your destination, and this redirect is useful by preventing that. Also, readers might search for this term (on accident, of course) using methods that don't autocorrect this kind of thing, and this redirect would be especially useful to them. Chess enjoyer (talk) 23:45, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Note: I, as nominator, have a few comments, which should not be treated as a !vote but are simply observations made to provide more information: 1) The redirect creation is mostly related to the discussion on the template redirect. That discussion had the only link to "Birtish" before nominating the redirect in this discussion. In addition, it's unlikely that this redirect would be created independently of that discussion given the strange target. 2) This word may possibly be a misspelling of birdish. In this case, only one letter is incorrect instead of two, and "Birtish" sounds more similar to "birdish" than "British". 3) Just about every possible misspelling exists on the internet. One source though describes that "Birtish" specifically is a last name, but that source may be unreliable. Mathguy2718 (talk) 04:27, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
"Birdish" seems like an enormous stretch to me. Even setting aside that "birdish" is a very uncommon word that few people would have cause to ever use, let alone misspell, the comparison of one letter's difference against two is very misleading. In English, as in many languages, errors of metathesis (swapping letters) are very, very common. In-fact, they're so common in English that the letters don't even need to be next to each other to swapped around (see spoonerism).
In contrast, randomly devoicing a consonant would be exceedingly weird in speech, let alone in writing. Especially so, as English, unlike languages like German or Russian, doesn't regularly devoice consonants like "d" to "t", and in-fact often does the opposite, voicing consonants like "s" and "t" to "z" and "d" in various contexts, including intervocalically (relevant to birtish-birdish if your dialect is non-rhotic) and in clusters with voiced consonants like "r" (relevant if your dialect is rhotic). – Scyrme (talk) 05:32, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Anagrams are more likely to be mistyping than with closer misspelling with distant keyboard letters. And if birdish existed, it could be linked in a see also section of british, but currently it's an obscure dictionary entry. Abesca (talk) 17:11, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
The thing is that this is part of what I thought made birtish a possible misspelling of "birdish". Also, maybe a reasoning for creating this redirect may help? I'm still trying to understand why you created this redirect to "Birt (disambiguation)". In case any logic for creating the current redirect exists. Mathguy2718 (talk) 03:07, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
oh I see. I've always pronounced the word standard as standart for some reason. But that's because they are syllabic consonants (silent vowel). while the reasoning was because -ish is a very common prefix for such words, isn't it? but I wondered if someone if could boldly retarget, thats why I inserted Brit dab in the see also. Abesca (talk) 03:48, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
I just assumed your native language was one where standart is the normal pronunciation or spelling. Standart in English is archaic; it's one of the variant spellings from Middle English, from the Old French estandart. If your native language is English, maybe it's survived in your dialect, idk. – Scyrme (talk) 04:06, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
No, it’s not my first language. My teacher teached me a lot of wrong pronunciations, and it was supposed to be American English (I have a hard time understanding British accent, even from people of my supposed regional accent, cause I notice the difference). And my native language is both syllable-timed and Latin-scripted, which makes difference in the nasalization/palatalization which is why birtish, for me, wouldn’t have the same sounding of birdish. Abesca (talk) 05:50, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to British per Scyrme. It is beyond plausible that this is a common typo for a very common demonym in the English language. Google Search results number nearly 200,000, which for a typo, is a very high number. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 18:22, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget → British as {{R from tpyo}} 😉. This is an extremely common typo that is frequently found online and even pops up occasionally in publishes sources such as The Independent‍ and others that have already been shared. Google Scholar has over 1,2000 hits for "birtish"! I find the WP:POINTy allegations unconvincing. But even if one doubts the redirect creator's intentions or judgment, we can still assess a redirect on the merits. I also find the birdish suggestion implausible. British is a vastly more common word than birdish and, correspondingly, misspellings or typos of British will be more common. As others have pointed out, there are specific reasons related to keyboards and phonetics why this particular misspelling of birdish is implausible. Per Ngram the misspelling/typo Birtish is, over time, way more common in books than the correct word birdish. Notably, Birtish is always capitalized, which is consistent with this being used as a proper noun. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 05:42, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:21, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to British as a plausible typo per the sources found by Mycteae. Honestly surprised about the sources found on it, but I thought it would have been a plausible typo anyways. Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:10, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Men's T20 World Cup Qualifier

The result of the discussion was retarget to Men's T20 World Cup regional qualification. (non-admin closure) thejiujiangdragon ^T/_C 20:22, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Men's T20 World Cup QualifierMen's T20 World Cup Qualifier → Men's T20 World Cup Global Qualifier (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Men's T20 World Cup Global Qualifier has been defunct for 4 years now. This title should either be re-targeted to or be disambiguated with the currently active Men's T20 World Cup regional qualification. Vestrian24Bio 07:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:57, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 22:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to the active competition and add a hatnote to the present target there. Thryduulf (talk) 12:08, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget per Thryduulf. Suonii180 (talk) 00:34, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Gender ambiguity

The result of the discussion was disambiguate. (non-admin closure) J 947 ‡ ^edits 06:56, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Gender ambiguity → Questioning (sexuality and gender) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Couldn't it also refer to Gender nonconformity as well? Note it was originally pointed to androgyny and there's already a hatnote for Ambiguous gender and Ambiguous genitalia. Abesca (talk) 03:09, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Honestly, I say at this point we have the makings of a disambiguation page, right here. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:35, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
I agree. I think having a disambiguation page is the way to go. Historyday01 (talk) 14:42, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
I'm also thinking disambiguation is the answer here. I'm also wondering if any of gender fluidity, non-binary gender, Gender bender (the top internal search result for ambiguous gender presentation) or Third gender should be included too? Note there is also a section Gender of connectors and fasteners#Ambiguous gender that should be linked, maybe as a see also. Mukhannath should definitely be a see also (short description "Ambiguous gender in classic Arab culture"). Thryduulf (talk) 03:48, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguate seems right to me, particularly given that Gender (disambiguation) exists, and there is therefore demonstrably ambiguity as to the meaning of "gender". BD2412 T 02:25, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
Looks more like a WP:SIA. And Ambiguous gender should not redirect to Spanish. Different languages have ambiguous gender grammar. Jay 💬 04:37, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguation draft requested (done) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:49, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment a disambiguation page has been drafted by BD2412 which I've subsequently added a couple of entries to and split into sections. Thryduulf (talk) 10:10, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
Looks good. Thanks everyone! Jay 💬 20:44, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

National Democratic Party (Philippines)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#National Democratic Party (Philippines)

Ramesses the Elder

The result of the discussion was Delete. Thryduulf (talk) 10:13, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Ramesses the Elder → Ramesses I (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Was not able to find any source corroborating this Ramesses I being called "the Elder" PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 15:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

It's just to follow convention, similar pharaohs have been called "the Elder" like Intef, Ahmose, and Osorkon, plus not to mention that Ramesses I's grandson, Rameses II, is called "the Great". UWMKEgypt (talk) 17:18, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:04, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete per WP:RDELETE#8. This appears to be a novel moniker invented by the redirect's creator. A Google search turns up exclusively Wikipedia links related to the redirect and one false positive (emphasis added): At eye level with Ramesses, the elder could not meet his gaze. Google Scholar and JSTOR both return zero hits for "Ramesses the Elder". —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:50, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
How else can we distinguish Ramesses I from his grandson Ramesses II, other than with the numbering system. UWMKEgypt (talk) 22:00, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
The numbering system works just fine. And even if it didn't, we don't make up new names. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:25, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete, moniker not backed by sources. Suonii180 (talk) 15:26, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Warriors (novel series) slang

The result of the discussion was delete. Thryduulf (talk) 10:18, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Sunningrocks → Warriors (novel series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Greencough → Warriors (novel series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Moonhigh → Warriors (novel series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mentions at the target. --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 20:19, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Discovery Sci-Trek

The result of the discussion was Keep. Nobody presented any rationale or clear desire for any change to the status quo. Thryduulf (talk) 10:21, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Discovery Sci-TrekDiscovery Sci-Trek → Discovery Science (European TV channel) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The target mentioned this as the former UK version of Discovery Science, but with no history attached to it other than it being formerly just a redirect, could this be kept or deleted? So, I'm listing this here for discussion. Intrisit (talk) 18:58, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Speedy keep WP:SK#3 Why did you even nominate this? Paradoctor (talk) 13:05, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
As my rationale may seem erroneous to you, at least it/this avoids/prevents any other editor from nominating this in the future. Intrisit (talk) 16:39, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
No, it doesn't. It didn't stop you, did it? Paradoctor (talk) 17:34, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Survivalism (life after death)

The result of the discussion was retarget to Soul#Survivalism. Thryduulf (talk) 10:36, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Survivalism (life after death)Survivalism (life after death) → Parapsychology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. The target does not discuss "survivalism" whatever it may be --Altenmann >talk 17:18, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Support retarget. A good find by Scyrme. --Altenmann >talk 19:10, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Soul, ideally to a {{visible anchor}}, where it's mentioned. Evidently, "survivalism" is used by some to refer to the survival of the soul or human "person" after death. Searching externally, the results I found related more to Thomist philosophy than parapsychology. (eg. Neo-Aristotelian Metaphysics and the Theology of Nature (book), Christian Scholar's Review (journal article), Just Thomism (Christian philosophy blog)) Soul also discusses it in this exact context. – Scyrme (talk) 17:29, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

As a note, this redirect has some history. It was, until 2012, a stub that did indeed discuss "survivalism" in a parapsychology context. However, the references on that stub were obviously promotional links to fringe organisations. This explains the present target. – Scyrme (talk) 17:41, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Additionally, if this redirect isn't deleted, I'd suggest linking it at Survivalism (disambiguation). I would add it now, but the short description would depend on what the target ends up being. – Scyrme (talk) 17:48, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Sure thing. --Altenmann >talk 19:10, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Soul#Survivalism where I've added a visible anchor, per Scyrme's suggestion. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:37, 24 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete. It's a made-up term with no widespread use and never included by topic experts in the lengthy Afterlife article or discussed on its talk page. 5Q5|^✉ 11:23, 24 March 2026 (UTC)
Made up? I already linked to examples which included 2 publications. I could link more if you want. (eg. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion, The Palgrave Handbook of the Afterlife, History of Philosophy Quarterly) – Scyrme (talk) 17:53, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget per Scryrme. Has some use. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:57, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

New Xbox

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 4#New Xbox

2027 Indian Premier League

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 2#2027 Indian Premier League

Untitled eighth Mission: Impossible film

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) Chess enjoyer (talk) 15:21, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Untitled eighth Mission: Impossible film → Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

per WP:UFILM. Gonnym (talk) 19:24, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Extremely strong keep. This redirect got over 1,500 views in the 30 days before this nomination, with only one day this year receiving fewer than 21 views (and that got 19), 7 days this year (including 28 February and 1 March) had more than 100 views in a day. I'm not sure how much less in accordance with what UFILM says a redirect can be and still get nominated here with that rationale? Thryduulf (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete as misleading, the film has a title (and has had one for a while). -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
~~Delete~~ Per the severe decline to 3 pageviews on March 8. Mysticair667537 (talk) 23:56, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete, pageviews have declined a lot in the 2 weeks since this was nominated. It now receives an average of only 1-4 views per day. Seems to have outlived its usefulness. ApexParagon (talk) 01:25, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep for now per Thryduulf, and renominate some months later. An RfD nomination breaks the redirect function, so a change based on the RfD date shouldn't be counted. Jay 💬 14:46, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
So like say, in 3 months' time? Intrisit (talk) 13:13, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep per WP:UFILM per Jay. J 947 ‡ ^edits 05:23, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep per WP:UFILM, although I don't know or haven't seen any line in there which states that; "20+ months after the final confirmed title, redirects like this can be deleted." which I believe the "keep" votes seem to lean towards. The target title was confirmed in November 2024 – approximately 15 months before this nomination. I'll list this myself by September (which would by then be 20+ months since), by which time, there'll be near-unanimous consensus to delete. But for now.... Intrisit (talk) 13:54, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep - While something more vague like "Untitled Mission Impossible film" would be more problematic as time passes, I have less concerns on this one, which specifically mentions it being the 8th in there. There can only be one 8th film in the franchise, it would have to refer to this. Sergecross73 msg me 16:05, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete later Keep for now due to the premature RfD nomination. Mysticair667537 (talk) 15:49, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Outline of Java

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 30#Outline of Java

Farsee

The result of the discussion was retarget to Persian language. (non-admin closure) NightWolf1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 16:19, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

FarseeFarsee → Persian (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

An AFCRD request, and while this isn't totally off the wall, it does stretch the plausibility line quite a bit. Simple web searches overwhelmingly come back with dictionary results about "farsee", an actual English word about...well, seeing far. Secondary results are all sorts of other mixed stuff, like names, software, other random stuff, but I couldn't find any actual misspellings of Farsi in the bunch, which by the way, refers to the language specifically. I recommend a delete to let the search engine take care of this one. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:35, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete for now as there doesn't seem to be a primary topic according to google Duckmather (talk) 05:37, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Neutral I accepted it, but I am as happy for it to be kept as deleted. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 08:00, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete, too ambiguous; lots of possibilities (including the current target and English word) but no target that stands out. Prefer to not target Farse. J 947 ‡ ^edits 08:19, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete. I agree with the nom and other contributors. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:08, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Persian language, where Farsi (itself a transliteration) points. BD2412 T 21:40, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Persian language as {{avoided double redirect}} for Farsi. This is a plausible romanisation of "Farsi" and should share the same target. In South Asia, it's common to use phonetic spellings like this rather than a systematic transliteration. (eg. Indian Express: "The Mughals introduced Farsee or Persian.") It also appears in historic sources which predate modern transliteration systems which use "i" not "ee". (eg. The History of Persia (1829), p. 487: "...orders the Farsee language to be...").
The English word isn't an encyclopedic topic (WP:NOTDICT), so is irrelevant; it will never have an article. If the other external results ever become notable topics, this can be brought back to RfD to discuss disambiguation after articles are made about them. (Or someone can boldly do it, if it seems like obviously the right move then.) Deleting it because there are non-notable topics elsewhere on the internet isn't helpful. – Scyrme (talk) 22:04, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:13, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Persian language per Scryme. NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 13:36, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget per Scryme. Thryduulf (talk) 13:19, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Hydroretorting

The result of the discussion was retarget to Hytort process. No opposition to the suggested target. Jay 💬 15:41, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

HydroretortingHydroretorting → Hydrogenation (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hydroretorting processHydroretorting process → Hydrogenation (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not explained at target. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 00:46, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Hytort process. Fairly sure "hytort" is an abbreviation of hydroretorting, and the two are synonymous. Though, "Hytort" could be a proprietary name for the generic process. – Scyrme (talk) 01:23, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:12, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

And it came to pass

The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 15:38, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

And it came to pass → Oakland California Temple#And it Came to Pass Pageant (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is not a great target for this redirect. One would expect when searching up this phrase to be taken to the article on the phrase, not to a section about a play. Thus I propose this redirect to either be re-targeted or deleted. NightWolf1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 02:23, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete per WP:RETURNTORED. This is a somewhat common biblical phrase which would fit right in as its own article at Category:Biblical phrases; albeit I would title it as "Come to pass" and leave "and it came to pass" as a redirect to it. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 20:07, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nom, 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞?, WP:RETURNTORED, and WP:RSURPRISE. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:43, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Del Wilson

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:40, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Del WilsonDel Wilson → Del Wilson Trophy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This page incorrectly redirects to the trophy named after Del Wilson. Instead, it should be an article about Del Wilson. In the meantime, this page should be deleted. Assadzadeh (talk) 01:00, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep. The redirect is not incorrect, as it is the only place where information is currently available on Del Wilson, as per WP:R#KEEP. Anyone is welcome to write a biography of Wilson to replace the redirect. Flibirigit (talk) 01:10, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep in lieu of bio. --Altenmann >talk 19:52, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep as per Flibirigit. Katiedevi (talk) 03:47, 25 March 2026 (UTC)